Wealthy people must embrace 'logic of giving,' Pope tells Sunday audience

[april32010]

Commenting on the Gospel story of the rich young man, Pope Benedict XVI told his Sunday audience that “it is very difficult but not impossible for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.”

"God can conquer the heart of a person with many possessions and lead him towards solidarity and sharing with the poor and needy, so that he can enter into the logic of giving,” the Pope told his October 14 audience. He added that this “logic of giving” is best illustrated by Jesus Himself, who—as St. Paul said, “became poor although He was rich, so that by his poverty you might become rich.”

The rich young man “had not found happiness,” although he had obeyed the commandments, the Pope continued. He wanted to attain salvation, but “he thought he could somehow ‘buy’ eternal life.” Jesus recognized the man’s conflict, and proposed the only solution: to give up the possessions that were blocking his spiritual growth and “could never give him happiness and eternal life.”

Although Jesus warns how difficult it is for the wealthy to attain salvation, the Pope pointed out that the history of the Church offers many examples of great saints who were wealthy. “Suffice to mention St. Francis, St. Elizabeth of Hungary and St. Charles Borromeo.” Their wealth was not an obstacle for them because they embraced the “logic of giving.”

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=15912

 

[april32010]

“God can conquer the heart of a person with many possessions and lead him towards solidarity and sharing with the poor and needy, so that he can enter into the logic of giving”, said the Pope commenting on today’s Gospel reading which narrates Jesus’ meeting with a rich young man.

“Jesus teaches that it is very difficult but not impossible for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God”, said the Holy Father in his remarks before praying the Angelus. “Indeed, through the ‘the logic of giving’, a person may follow the path of Jesus Christ Who, as the Apostle Paul wrote, ‘for your sake … became poor although he was rich, so that by his poverty you might become rich’”.

Benedict XVI went on to remind faithful gathered in St. Peter’s Square that the young man in question had scrupulously observed all the commandments of God’s Law, but “had not found true happiness. For this reason, he asked Jesus ‘what must I do to inherit eternal life?’ On the one hand he was attracted, like everyone else, to the fullness of life; on the other, being used to his wealth, he thought he could somehow ‘buy’ eternal life, perhaps by observing some special commandment”.

Christ was aware of the man’s desires but also of his weakness, “his sense of attachment to his great riches”. Therefore He suggested giving everything to the poor so that “his treasure - and therefore his heart - should be in heaven and not on earth. Jesus told the man: ‘Come, follow me!’ However, instead of welcoming Jesus’ invitation with joy, he went away sadly because he could not give up his possessions, which could never give him happiness and eternal life”.

It was at this point that Jesus pronounced the famous phrase: “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the kingdom of God”. However, seeing His disciples’ perplexity he added: “For human beings it is impossible, but not for God. All things are possible for God”. Commenting on this parable, St. Clement of Alexandria wrote: “Let it teach the prosperous that they are not to neglect their own salvation, as if they had been already condemned, nor, on the other hand, to cast wealth into the sea, or condemn it as a traitor and an enemy to life, but learn in what way and how to use wealth and obtain life”.

“The history of the Church”, the Pope concluded, “is full of examples of rich people who have used their wealth evangelically, even attaining sainthood. Suffice to mention St. Francis, St. Elisabeth of Hungary and St. Charles Borromeo”.

visnews-en.blogspot.com/2012/10/angelus-rich-must-enter-into-logic-of.html

 

[liturgyluver]

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=15912

Beautifully put by the Holy Father. At the homily on Sunday our Parish priest commenting on this week’s Gospel reading said we all - each and every Catholic - have a duty to help and support the poor, and this duty is not negated by just tossing some money into the church basket each week. He wants everyone to identify what they will personally do by Advent. Powerful stuff.

 

[ringil]

Great comments by the Holy Father!

 

[Brendan]

Well Said

 

[triumphguy]

Note the examples Pope Benedict uses: St. Francis and St. Elizabeth who gave up all their possessions to live lives of poverty and humility, and St. Charles who used all his personal possessions and all his time and energy in the service of the church.

So the Pope is raising the bar.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Note the examples Pope Benedict uses: St. Francis and St. Elizabeth who gave up all their possessions to live lives of poverty and humility, and St. Charles who used all his personal possessions and all his time and energy in the service of the church.

So the Pope is raising the bar.

But what if you use the money to buy a farm, employing 50 people (or whatever). Isn’t that an even better way to use your wealth?

 

[Brendan]

Note the examples Pope Benedict uses: St. Francis and St. Elizabeth who gave up all their possessions to live lives of poverty and humility, and St. Charles who used all his personal possessions and all his time and energy in the service of the church.

So the Pope is raising the bar.

Sort of.

He does list specific examples of those who determined that they were called to give away all their wealth. But he does not make any claim that EVERYONE is called to give away all their wealth.

Quite the opposite, as he also quotes St. Clement, “Let it teach the prosperous that they are not to neglect their own salvation, as if they had been already condemned, nor, on the other hand, to cast wealth into the sea, or condemn it as a traitor and an enemy to life, but learn in what way and how to use wealth and obtain life”."

What the Pope is calling for is for each person to examine the gift of wealth they have in their lives and to discern how God wishes it to be used. To neither toss it away, nor to hoard it.

St. Louis of France is a good example of one who was not called to give away the entirety of their wealth, but to be good stewards of it. St. Thomas More was also a wealthy man who was not called to give away his personal wealth, but rather his life instead.

 

[triumphguy]

But what if you use the money to buy a farm, employing 50 people (or whatever). Isn’t that an even better way to use your wealth?

It’s very very good, but is it better than Francis, Clare, Elizabeth?

It’s kinda like the difference between Martha and Mary.

 

[triumphguy]

Sort of.

He does list specific examples of those who determined that they were called to give away all their wealth. But he does not make any claim that EVERYONE is called to give away all their wealth.

Quite the opposite, as he also quotes St. Clement, “Let it teach the prosperous that they are not to neglect their own salvation, as if they had been already condemned, nor, on the other hand, to cast wealth into the sea, or condemn it as a traitor and an enemy to life, but learn in what way and how to use wealth and obtain life”."

What the Pope is calling for is for each person to examine the gift of wealth they have in their lives and to discern how God wishes it to be used. To neither toss it away, nor to hoard it.

St. Louis of France is a good example of one who was not called to give away the entirety of their wealth, but to be good stewards of it. St. Thomas More was also a wealthy man who was not called to give away his personal wealth, but rather his life instead.

Of course you are right, but it is interesting that he used those three saints.

And Thomas More did lose everything for the kingdom. He was canonized because of his sacrifice. He not only lost his life, but prior to that his freedom, his position in society and all his wealth.

 

[stinkcat_14]

But what if you use the money to buy a farm, employing 50 people (or whatever). Isn’t that an even better way to use your wealth?

While there is nothing wrong with investing to make a profit, and often times people are hired along the way, investing to make a profit is not the same as charity and there are times when charity is preferable. For example, if you take the money that would have bought the farm and started a school, in the long run those 50 people could be making even more money than they would have as farm workers.

 

[Brendan]

While there is nothing wrong with investing to make a profit, and often times people are hired along the way, investing to make a profit is not the same as charity and there are times when charity is preferable. For example, if you take the money that would have bought the farm and started a school, in the long run those 50 people could be making even more money than they would have as farm workers.

Remember that all employment is is an investment of time in seach of personal profit. Everyone who maintains a job is, by definition, seeking to make a profit on their expenditure of time.

Given your example, it is more charitable for a person to volunteer their time at a soup kitchen than it is to go to work.

But is that really what the Church, or the Pope is asking here, to not go to work and to volunteer at soup kitchens instead?

Or is it rather that one must be conscience of how they expend the profits gained via their investments (of any type)

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Our priest gave a similar homily on Sunday. This being Virginia, he did mention that we have a right to own property. But our property cannot own us.

Some can continue to hold wealth and use it to benefit the poor around them (St Louis of France); however others it seems cannot do both. They are continually distracted by the lure of their wealth and do not give the “first fruits”, but only from their surplus. For those people, St Francis may be the better example.

As for St. Thomas More, remember that he first gave up his position and therefore his means to wealth, long before he was imprisoned and then beheaded.

 

[Brendan]

As for St. Thomas More, remember that he first gave up his position and therefore his means to wealth, long before he was imprisoned and then beheaded.

He gave up his political office, that is true, but he still retained land and his legal practice. Of course, both of those were confiscated or prohibited upon his arrest.

But I am sure that we can agree that having one’s wealth taken by the State is not the same as giving it away as charity

 

[triumphguy]

He gave up his political office, that is true, but he still retained land and his legal practice. Of course, both of those were confiscated or prohibited upon his arrest.

But I am sure that we can agree that having one’s wealth taken by the State is not the same as giving it away as charity

And would he have become a saint without the arrest, confiscation, and martyrdom?

Thomas More was a holy man (hair shirt and all), but was he a saint until he had to choose between God and King?.

He knew that his choice was likely to lead to losing his wealth and privilege, if not his life: he knew what kind of man Henry VIII was.

So he chose to give all away for the sake of the kingdom.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Remember that all employment is is an investment of time in seach of personal profit. Everyone who maintains a job is, by definition, seeking to make a profit on their expenditure of time.

This is true.

Given your example, it is more charitable for a person to volunteer their time at a soup kitchen than it is to go to work.

This is true as well, going to work is not charity, it is something we do out of our own self interest. Going to work is good, but if that is all we do there is something wrong.

But is that really what the Church, or the Pope is asking here, to not go to work and to volunteer at soup kitchens instead?

Or is it rather that one must be conscience of how they expend the profits gained via their investments (of any type)

I think the point is that while the market provides lots of benefits, there are somethings that the market cannot provide. As Christians it is up to us to provide those things, but to provide those things we need to consciously choose that we are going to do some things that are not aligned with our self interests.

 

[Brendan]

And would he have become a saint without the arrest, confiscation, and martyrdom?

Thomas More was a holy man (hair shirt and all), but was he a saint until he had to choose between God and King?.

He knew that his choice was likely to lead to losing his wealth and privilege, if not his life: he knew what kind of man Henry VIII was.

So he chose to give all away for the sake of the kingdom.

Yes, but if Henry had chosen to continue to pay his salary as Chancellor, would that have lessened his Christian witness?

In the case, of St. Francis, if he had retained his lifestyle, the witness given by the life of St. Francis would HAVE been lessened. Not so with St. Thomas More. If his income had not be confiscated, the witness he provided with his death would have been the same.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

This is true as well, going to work is not charity, it is something we do out of our own self interest. Going to work is good, but if that is all we do there is something wrong.

Self interest?

Is that what you would call the guy clocking in 9-5 just so he could send his kids to school?

Is that what you call the girl working overtime so she could pay the bills?

Is that what you would call working parents having to struggle with horrible taxes?

If that is being self-interested then count me in among those greedy and ambitious job seekers.

As Christians it is up to us to provide those things, but to provide those things we need to consciously choose that we are going to do some things that are not aligned with our self interests.

From my experience, there is nothing you can give when you don’t give it to yourself first. Ever heard of a free lunch? It doesn’t exist.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

But what if you use the money to buy a farm, employing 50 people (or whatever). Isn’t that an even better way to use your wealth?

Hopefully you don’t mean something like this.

 

[mh2007]

<<…going to work is not charity, it is something we do out of our own self interest. Going to work is good, but if that is all we do there is something wrong.>>

I believe going to work is a central part of charitable living, especially for parents. This activity provides the resources needed to sustain life and maintain a comfortable living. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable rights endowed to us by our Creator. So is the right to self-determination.

Those who work hard and succeed in business multiply the fruits of their labors by providing others with a variety of goods and services, and they also employ lots of people in the process. That gives others the benefit of good jobs that provide resources for their families as well.

This in not in opposition to the ‘logic of giving’ - it is the very essence of giving - manifested in real opportunities for people to grow and flourish.

Living a life of service through business is a very noble calling. Most wealthy people I know get it, and they are very charitable outside of their businesses as well.